My Ideal School—Structure

I'm just going to make an outline here, a list as much as anything.

K-4 & 5: Classical learning, with a Montessori-style emphasis on practical life skills. Half-day seems sufficient to me, though I know that the working schedules of parents may not make it as appealing as full-day.

1st through 3rd/5th: Grammar Stage, though the material is presented according to level of ability.

Dialectic: Middle School

Rhetoric: High School

Ideally?

Lunch is a sit-down affair in which children do learn to use a napkin (preferably a cloth one) AND good table manners. As an example, I offer you this interesting link to the web site of a woman who, not so long ago, moved to France and is sharing her experience by comparing the typical French school menu to the typical American school menu: brightonyourhealth

Of course, it is impossible to bring this about in a school with many hundreds of children, so . . .

Ideally?

Schools should be small and run K-4 through 12th. In my experience, in smaller schools where the grades run the gamut, there is better social adjustment among all the students. The younger ones look to the older ones for good examples of how to behave, while the older ones benefit from the knowledge that the younger ones do look up to them. It's a circle-of-life kind of thing. The way our public system currently works in the U.S. is that it breaks that circle, leaving a lot of loose ends, and don't even get me started on the "Lord of the Flies" known as middle school.

Middle schoolers, perhaps more than anyone else, need the example, the attention, and positive interaction with those a little bit older than themselves. I would go so far as to say that they actually crave it. They want the chance to express themselves and to be validated when appropriate, and perhaps "smacked down" (resepectfully, of course) when they need it.

I believe that part of the reason that our children are remaining children so long (well into their twenties, according to "experts") is that the "socialization" that is occurring in the public school system is not helpful, but is, in fact, damaging to many as they develop from children to young adults. Babies, after all, graduate from milk to solid foods at the right age, losing their milk teeth and gaining adult teeth to better handle the solids. Can you imagine a ten year-old who has never had anything but milk to drink his entire life? Wouldn't you expect there to be some deleterious physical consequence as a result?

Ideally?

Now, this is a real kicker. It is very hard to make happen, whether public or private school is in question.

The school should be near to the home of the child. Impossible I know. But it would be ideal, in my opinion. Otherwise, everyone loses valuable time to the commute, and isn't time one of our greatest luxuries? I remember having time to just be bored as a child, and like nap time, I wish I could have bottled that time and saved it for later. sigh.

Being able to walk (safely) to school would provide time for children and parents to talk (or comfortably say nothing), to breathe deeply, to enjoy the weather (or appreciate the indoors!), and to notice the natural world, which is so easy to overlook and take for granted when, as a Ugandan Orthodox priest once said, we "move from our little box that we call home, to our little box on wheels, to another little box that we call school or work." He was right. Still is.

'Nuff for now.

My Ideal School—The Classical Model

Where were we? Oh, yes . . . Education in the classical style.

I happened to visit yesterday a home school cooperative that utilizes a classical model of education. The kindergarten classes were learning Latin, the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics—albeit it on a very simple level—and a little bit of the history of the Vietnam War, with simple geography lessons about Southeast Asia. The five year-olds were learning to identify the countries by shape and location, and they seemed to enjoy doing it, as the parent/teacher made it thoroughly hands-on and engaging.

The older elementary students were learning the same lessons, but on a higher level, and in more detail.

The high school students had a completely different curriculum, which is to be expected, because they have already learned what the younger students are learning, but when I sat in on a group of 7th graders, they were playing a game of Jeopardy, "hosted" by the parent/teacher, in which there were two teams playing for nothing more than the highest number of points (as opposed to dollars or other prizes). the questions were spread over many different subject areas, and I would have to admit that I didn't know many of the answers myself. Though the middle and high school students only attend school one day per week, the program is strenuous enough that they must make the most of the intervening time to finish the assigned work by the next class day.

The time that I spent observing these students in their respective classes was informative and rewarding.

The classical model of education can basically be broken down into three parts:

The Grammar Stage, in which children memorize and recite their facts. These students are in their earlier elementary school stage.

The Dialectic Stage, in which facts continue to be memorized, but students learn to analyze the information they're taking in and to discuss it in depth. These students are in the upper elementary and middle school stage.

The Rhetoric Stage, in which students study and learn at a higher level, doing research, learning not only to discuss, but to debate, to speak publicly and give oral presentations. I've noticed that students who are educated through this stage tend to be more poised and have more confidence when speaking with and in front of adults. Why? Simple. Because they've practiced.

By the time the student has matriculated, he/she is pretty well prepared to move into adulthood, which is no small accomplishment in today's culture, in my humble opinion.

My Ideal School—Part 1

Forgive me, I must blog about my ideal school. My husband said I should, and I think he is right. Caution: potential ranting ahead.

First up, the Classical Education.

I never understood why all my school subjects were handled as separate universes, sufficient unto themselves, when I was in public school (Private school is frequently not much different, mind you.).

Each subject, and let's list them for the sake of clarity—math, English (also known as Language Arts), history, science, music, art, handwriting (a rapidly dying art, I'm afraid, in the orgy [forgive me] of keyboarding that is taking place in our insanely frenetic world) . . . did I miss any? Probably. Anyway, each subject, was taught without any real reference to the others.

In history we might be learning about the French Revolution, while in math we're grinding away at Algebra without ever knowing who first discovered these functions and what made them want to. And over here we might be reading "The Catcher in the Rye", but learning about Degas and Beethoven.

Is it any wonder we don't retain what were being fed? Why should be hop back and forth around the world and across several eras all at once? Why couldn't we just pack up our trunks, make the journey, and plop our selves down for a good old-fashioned visit, remaining in one place and time for a few weeks or even—gasp!—a whole month?

Why don't we start with the ancients and learn about the individuals who discovered and implemented the principles of mathematics and science? It would have been simple enough in the early days, right? And I bet more students would retain more of what they learned in the process.

We could then proceed around the world, chronologically, using—and this is REALLY important—Original Source Material. That's right. Instead of reading about the Magna Carta, the would read the Magna Carta; instead of reading about the the Declaration of Independence, the would read the real thing, or a reasonable facsimile thereof; instead of reading pre-selected excerpts, pull-quotes and captions, they would get their (ideally greedy) little hands on the real deal.

To give them bits and pieces of an education is like giving a child a toy that is meant to mimic real tools and devices that big people, accomplished people, fully individuated people (And remind me again, exactly how do the aforementioned get that way? By eating pretend food and playing make believe at everything they do in life?) use for creating and operating in the real world. As anyone who has spent time with a small child will know, they will not long remain satisfied with the play kitchen, the pretend remote, the fake car keys, the computer replica, the toy tools, and other colorful plastic items of the same ilk.

No, of course not. They want the real thing. They understand intrinsically that they're being given a predigested copy of something that must be appealing or no one would have bothered with its imitation. But why, they ask, do I not get the real thing? Why is that being kept from me?

Are children wrong to feel this way? I know how I feel about news media choosing for me what is important for me to know and what is not. I know how I feel when an item that I purchase does not work well or breaks long before it was supposed to. It feels fake. I feel cheated.

So, why do we do this to our children? Why do we cheat them? Why in the world would we cheat their minds of the opportunity to learn as much as they are capable of learning? Why do we assume that the limitations we set for ourselves are necessarily appropriate for them? Many of us grew up on the gruel of mediocre education, but does what was deemed "good enough" for us have to be the same bar we set for our children?

Some of my teachers in school were outstanding. Some I barely remember. Along with the bland information they presented. The only texts I remember are the originals that we were somehow fortunate enough to be handed, or the ones I read on my own. Is that the way it should be? No wonder our children retreat to computers, T.V. and video games. It's for the lack of anything more interesting to come from the adults entrusted with educating them in the things they need to know to live this life, in this world.

And we only get one chance. Once they're out of school their education, or lack thereof, is a part of who they are and will be. No mulligans, I'm afraid. How many children, when out of school during a break or summer vacation, pick up a book that requires anything of them? How many high schoolers will pick up a book that requires more than a sixth grade reading level? Or do they need Manga actually to finish reading the story? Once upon a time, not so very long ago, it was stated that in order to read the original King James Version of the Bible, one needed an 11th or 12th grade reading ability. What is it now, I wonder? Masters, maybe? PhD?

Enough of my rant. Back to Classical Education. Back to the original drawing board. Back to my ideal school.

To be continued . . .